Morgenbesser v. Van Aken

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Morgenbesser v. Van Aken

50 A.D.2d 894, 376 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11793

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 29, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 894 (Morgenbesser v. Van Aken) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morgenbesser v. Van Aken, 50 A.D.2d 894, 376 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11793 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding inter alia for the appointment of a receiver, petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 3, 1975, which denied the application. Proceeding remitted to Special Term for the purpose of conducting a hearing to determine how petitioner’s attorney obtained possession of the check in question and appeal held in abeyance in the interim. After considering the record on appeal, including correspondence referred to in the opposing affidavit of Sherman F. Sosnow, Esq., we conclude that a hearing will best resolve the allegations herein. It might be advisable for the Justice who heard this matter to consider whether he should disqualify himself upon the hearing. Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a proceeding inter alia for the appointment of a receiver, petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 3, 1975, which denied the application. Proceeding remitted to Special Term for the purpose of conducting a hearing to determine how petitioner’s attorney obtained possession of the check in question and appeal held in abeyance in the interim. After considering the record on appeal, including correspondence referred to in the opposing affidavit of Sherman F. Sosnow, Esq., we conclude that a hearing will best resolve the allegations herein. It might be advisable for the Justice who heard this matter to consider whether he should disqualify himself upon the hearing. Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 894, 376 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11793, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgenbesser-v-van-aken-nyappdiv-1975.